7D grain issues - DPChallenge Forums

Fujifilm XF 18-55mm f/2.8-4 OIS

09/27/2010 02:52:35 AM · #1

This is a picture taken at 800 ISO, viewed at 100%. I thought the 7D was supposed to be good at low lighting. I never considered 800 ISO to be that low. If you have a 7D, are you getting grain like this in the 640-800 ISO range?

docpjv

Fujifilm X-E1

09/27/2010 03:29:50 AM · #2

Nope, especially not at that ISO. Looks more to what I get at 6400!

RamblinR

Olympus OM-D E-M1 Mark III

Olympus 12-40mm f/2.8 Pro

09/27/2010 04:18:37 AM · #3

Was this the image as shot or was it underexposed and you brought it up to this?

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0 L USM

09/27/2010 06:46:09 AM · #4

I did a little highlight recovery in RAW.

Here's the original, unedited (except cropping it down.)

david_c

Canon EOS-7D

09/27/2010 06:52:37 AM · #5

Oh, my...no. Never seen that at 800. I've never seen grain that coarse on any ISO from my 7D. I have no idea what's going on there. :((

09/27/2010 07:14:29 AM · #6

any 7D owners out there. Could you please open some of your files in photoshop, bring them up to actual pixels, and crop out a section and post it here? I would love to know what they're supposed to look like at different ISOs

I'm really starting to panic. I'm doing a wedding on Saturday, and I should be using the 7D so that they can make enlargements, but I'm wondering whether I should switch back to my 40D.

MinsoPhoto

Canon EOS-7D

Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM

09/27/2010 07:18:50 AM · #7

I will try and post a few when I get home. For right now I have this shot I can show from my port. Of course it is edited and resized but it is a significant crop and it was at iso 3200.

09/27/2010 07:22:45 AM · #8

If you have the original, unedited version that you could should at 100%, that would be helpful. I've been able to get things to look fine small, but when you enlarge, it's extremely obvious that there's an issue.

09/27/2010 07:27:38 AM · #9

This is an original viewed at actual pixels -- shot probably around 2000 ISO

This is the original shot shrunk down and even sharpened after the shrink, and it looks fine.

So small seems to be okay. But if I printed an enlargement on that shot, I assume it would look like the first image and look horrid.

I know I can do noise adjustment, but I thought the 7D was supposed to be better than this.

(now I realize that 2000 is more extreme -- but I'm getting this at 640 and 800 as well)

Here's two examples at actual pixels -- 320 ISO

Message edited by author 2010-09-27 07:36:53.

09/27/2010 08:07:58 AM · #10

Can you show a screen shot of the histogram of the original unedited shot with no adjustments made to it?

09/27/2010 08:24:16 AM · #11

.

Message edited by author 2010-09-27 08:25:35.

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0 L USM

09/27/2010 08:25:13 AM · #12

The first shot is a little underexposed. Here's the histogram and the original shot (actual pixels):

I wouldn't have thought that the amount of underexposure would make that significant of grain. It's not that badly underexposed.

Here's a shot that's exposed better and it's corresponding histogram. There's still a lot of grain.

david_c

Canon EOS-7D

09/27/2010 08:25:15 AM · #13

Originally posted by vawendy:

I know I can do noise adjustment, but I thought the 7D was supposed to be better than this.

Do you have in-camera noise reduction (I think it's called "High ISO Noise Reduction" in the menu) turned off, by any chance? FWIW, Noiseware does a pretty good job of eliminating ISO grain without sacrificing too much detail. Have you done a side-by-side comparison with your 40D?

Olympus OM-D E-M1 Mark III

09/27/2010 08:27:23 AM · #14

Originally posted by david_c:

Originally posted by vawendy:
I know I can do noise adjustment, but I thought the 7D was supposed to be better than this.

Do you have in-camera noise reduction (I think it's called "High ISO Noise Reduction" in the menu) turned off, by any chance? FWIW, Noiseware does a pretty good job of eliminating ISO grain without sacrificing too much detail. Have you done a side-by-side comparison with your 40D?

The high ISO noise reduction is turned off. But I wouldn't have thought that 800 would be considered high ISO. I thought you used that for 2000-6400.

I'm in the process of comparing the 40D and the 7D. I just took some shots of a teacup, and I'm downloading them right now. It may not be a good object for the comparison -- but we'll see.

RamblinR

Olympus 12-40mm f/2.8 Pro

09/27/2010 09:25:27 AM · #15

Haven't really pushed my camera up in ISO that much but maybe these will be useful for you.

All shot at 1000 ISO - Full shot followed by crop

This had already been cropped a bit so this is a pretty heavy crop on the small pic

Edit to add: These are JPG images.

Message edited by author 2010-09-27 16:51:59.

Olympus OM-D E-M1 Mark III

09/27/2010 09:41:20 AM · #16

That's at 1000 ISO? I haven't had anything anywhere near that clean below 400 ISO.

RamblinR

Olympus 12-40mm f/2.8 Pro

09/27/2010 09:46:03 AM · #17

Wendy, looking at some of the shots in your portfolio taken with the 7d and a high ISO there doesn't seem to be a problem (but then again you may have used noise reduction).

Have you tried clearing your camera back to default settings and testing it again? Maybe a setting has caused the problem.

Message edited by author 2010-09-27 09:49:35.

09/27/2010 09:57:56 AM · #18

Originally posted by RamblinR:

I've denoised almost every shot that I've taken with the 7D -- at least in the last month or so.
Even if it's not denoised, you don't really see the problem when you're dealing with a smaller image. Here's the original of the first shot I posted, resized and sharpened -- not denoised.

09/27/2010 10:24:37 AM · #19

Originally posted by vawendy:

The first shot is a little underexposed. Here's the histogram and the original shot (actual pixels):

I wouldn't have thought that the amount of underexposure would make that significant of grain. It's not that badly underexposed.

Here's a shot that's exposed better and it's corresponding histogram. There's still a lot of grain.

Both of those shots are underexposed by at least 1/3 to 2/3 of a stop in my opinion. That is the problem with your noise.

09/27/2010 10:29:27 AM · #20

This is 1600ISO with a proper exposure. I can pull a 100% crop of it tonight if you would like. But I'm at work right now.

09/27/2010 10:50:00 AM · #21

Originally posted by MattO:

Originally posted by vawendy:
The first shot is a little underexposed. Here's the histogram and the original shot (actual pixels):

I wouldn't have thought that the amount of underexposure would make that significant of grain. It's not that badly underexposed.

Here's a shot that's exposed better and it's corresponding histogram. There's still a lot of grain.

Both of those shots are underexposed by at least 1/3 to 2/3 of a stop in my opinion. That is the problem with your noise.

But since I'm shooting in RAW, I should have the latitude to change it 1/3, yet it doesn't fix the grain issue.

Here is a shot that's obviously not underexposed, but see how bad the grain is in the background?

here's the histogram

and that's only at 640 ISO

Here's one that's even worse -- 640 ISO

Message edited by author 2010-09-27 10:54:08.